Skip to main content

About this Show


News/Business. (2013)




San Francisco, CA, USA

Comcast Cable

Virtual Ch. 760 (FOX NEWS HD)






America 8, Sean 5, Tucker 5, Hannity 4, Harlem 4, Obama 4, Canada 3, Thomas Sowell 3, New York 3, China 3, Paul Ryan 2, Kellogg 2, Legalzoom 2, Patty Murray 2, Harry Reid 2, Donald Smith 2, Max Baucus 2, Steve King 2, Marco Rubio 2, Murray 2,
Borrow a DVD
of this show
  FOX News    Hannity    News/Business.  (2013)  

    March 16, 2013
    2:00 - 3:00am PDT  

from what angle, ivan? and hannah, pennsylvania. read your book, lincoln's last days, the best book i ever read. thank you, hannah, and a book, kennedy's last days and it will be out in june and i will send you a copy. if you buy any of my books, you get a fabulous factor mug. please check it out. and time for the factor tip of the day. celebrating st. the pat tricks day, this weekend you'll see a lot of green clothing like this and some green fausts, as alcohol will flow freely in homage to the irish. that's not what irish culture really is. as a thoroughbred irish on both sides, i understand my people, they are generally generous, witty, curious and loyal. generally. the old country's beautiful. i'm going there in june, but
it's a bit sad because of all the occupations and the poverty. now, many of my ancestors came to america during the great famine of the mid 19th century which was horrible. ireland used to be built around a pub culture where folks gathered to socialize and indeed alcohol has been a big problem for the celtic people. and here is my tip of the day, do not get drunk to celebrate st. patrick. he wouldn't like it. he was the kind of guy who helped the poor, so give your booze money to charity, have a few laughs with irish friends and get home early. factor tip of the day. and of the hat to you. that's it for us tonight. check out the fox news factor website, different from and please sound off from the factor from anywhere in the world., anytime, if you wish to opine, word of the day oldie, but goody.
and do not be pecksniffian. remember, the spinps here because we are definitely looking out for you. welcome to the friday night edition of "hannity," i'm tucker carlson in tonight for sean. we watch as democrats and republicans unveiled their budgets for the 2014 fiscal year, and while they said paul ryan's plan as extreme and tonight there are questions of the democrat's budget by patty murray and why are they saying they'll reduce 1.9 billion dollars declining to account for the spending.
he confronted murray's staff yesterday. take a look. >> and we're looking at a situation, where you're double counting and not counting a trillion dollars in extra spending. you're not counting a trillion dollars in extra spending by saying we're going to just turn off the sequester which allows a trillion dollars more in spending to occur and not count it. that's what we want to know and we intend to find out before this day is over and my colleagues, if i'm wrong about this, i'll accept being in error, but our staff has looked at this. i can't possibly see how it's any other way than i have explained it. now, we've got other members who want to ask questions. >> yes, we do-- >> a trillion dollars, we're really showing how it is that our country is in such financial state. >> senator jeff sessions. here is what else we know about the murray budget.
according to the budget staff it will increase taxes by 1.5 trillion dollars, it will increase spending by 62%. it will lower gdp by more than 2 trillion dollars over the next decade, it will cost 600,000 jobs per year. cut after tax income by almost 3 trillion dollars and reduce household income overall by well over 2 grand. and harry reid says the ryan budget is extreme? to weigh in, kirsten powers and co-host of "the five" dana perino. mike crapo, the senator from idaho asked the budget staff, what about the budget? we haven't seen the details, what do you make of it, what's the cuts and deficit reduction and i'm quoting now, it's zero in the first year in total said a member of that state to the senator. they're not trying, right? zero? >> well, i don't know why anybody's really shocked by this. after all we've heard from many leaders in the democratic
party that they don't even think there is a spending problem. so, and the president has made pretty clear that cutting the deficit isn't his top priority. so, you know, i mean i actually don't share that point of view and i think there are democrats who don't share that point of view, but the fact of the matter is the people who are leaders of the democratic party today have been pretty clear they're in the sort of paul krugman camp of this is not a problem. it's a problem that's going to be a problem in ten years and right now need to focus on spending money and keeping the economy moving and worry about the deficit later. >> that's a fair point, isn't it? they're not pretending. i'm outraged because it seems like an offense against math and science even. >> the first camp the krugman folks, the ones that think it's okay to let the debt and deficit go up. okay, then let's try to slow it down a little bit, but it's okay to have some. that would be obama, actually that's what he said this week,
president obama did on the george stephanopoulos interview he did this week with abc. the other group like simpson bowls, fix the debt ceo's and house republicans say no, the debt and deficit are a problem for us, and holding back growth where jeff sessions is. is it possible the two camps, three camps can come together and have a grand bargain like the media likes to talk about. i think it's hard to imagine that will be the case. one of the reaps we had tsons w that, the first time in years, the president didn't go first. we don't have it yet and we won't for a couple of weeks. and the white house is taking a close look at the criticism of patty murray's budget so they don't end up in the same boat. >> interesting, kirsten? >> i'd he say dana said what the president said in the interview. i think rather than looking alt what the president said,
we need to look at his actions and when something is important to him, we know what he does, he go out and barn-storms and he hasn't typically done that with the deficit. the last couple of years, for example. whatever he says about it, it doesn't seem to be a high priority and like, there are democrats who care about this. their way a new democratic group, very concerned about it. they do think it's something that the president needs to address. >> here is a question related to that. you heard dana mention erskine bowles, long time democrat worked for clinton and et cetera, et cetera. i keep hearing firsthand reports at that erskine bowles is telling people, a lot of people that he's extremely frustrated with obama's unwillingness to facedown our debt problem. why isn't he saying it in public? >> and plenty of like-minded democrats say that behind the scenes and they do express it to the white house and they've
been very disappointed. they believe that the president's rhetoric wanting to have a grand bargain we saw all the way up to the election was sincere and now they started to say, look, put your money where your mouth is because there doesn't seem to be the kind of, like what you see when president obama wants something, he goes after it. and so, making a few comments here and there, we need to see him step up and be the person to bring the democrats on this, because i don't think if you look at the murray bill that's quite where they are. >> and why doesn't the president? what, would it hurt him politically if he were to take this serious. >> yes. >> you think it would? >> it would hurt him with his ambitions that he's laid out. for example, today in illinois, president obama talked about a new energy trust. more spending for things like solyndra. okay, that was one thing, that was their message point today. it was very strange. >> that's kind of dilutional, right. >> and think about the keystone pipeline as a gift.
basically now everybody has blessed it except for president obama. we're waiting on his decision which he says to the house republicans will come this week, but i think it's a very interesting point about erskine bowles and other democrats behind the scenes, president obama's problem isn't necessarily the republicans. he's got a huge problem with the senate democrats. he can't bring them along on something that the government should be doing anyway, which is the changed cpi, which is really like a technical fix and inflation goes up and down and spending, it's not reform, it's something that the government should be doing anyway, and he this week, a wall street journal headline, president obama tries to woo democrats over to his side. so his problem is not with the republicans, he would probably be able to triangulate with them. the problem is on his left. where are they? you always see, there's always some courageous member of a party who stands up against his own leadership to say this is just wrong. on the democratic side i'm sure there's grumbling and i hear about it, but where is
the courageous person who is going to make that public? >> nowhere. i mean, come on, it was left to rand paul to say anything about the drums. you didn't see anything, ron wyden, no one to stand up for profiles in courage in anything that i can tell. dana is right the reason that republicans are saying why hasn't-- why hasn't the senate proposed a budget or passed a budget, it's because the democrats can't agree on it. if it's within their own caucus that they cannot reach agreement on these issues, they can't reach agreement on what to do with entitlements or long-term spending on what to do about taxes. and it is an issue, but isn't that what the president is supposed to do? it seems like the president should be the one that's sort of bringing the people together. >> it's a strange position for a president that won by as much as he did, and in his second term to have such short-term thinking. >> exactly, exactly. >> what kind of legacy do you want to lead and start thinking about it now. >> that's such a smart point.
thank you two both. i appreciate it. >> thank you, tucker. >> coming up. >> to protect our children in school, we recommend a trained professional with a they recommend scissors and they say we're crazy? >> coming up, lots of action at cpac today. the great charles krauthammer reacts to some of the biggest speakers, wayne lapierre, mitt romney and of course the donald. and the campaigner-- and the campaigner-- they've found a way to the
try running four.ning a restaurant is hard, fortunately we've got ink. it gives us 5x the rewards on our internet, phone charges and cable, plus at office supply stores. rewards we put right back into our business. this is the only thing we've ever wanted to do and ink helps us do it. make your mark with ink from chase.
it's delicious. so now we've turned her toffee into a business. my goal was to take an idea and make it happen. i'm janet long and i formed my toffee company through legalzoom. never really thought i would make money doing what i love. [ robert ] we created legalzoom to help people start their business and launch their dreams. go to today and make your business dream a reality. at we put the law on your side.
and make your business dream a reality. great first gig! let's go! party! awwwww... arigato! we are outta here! party...... finding you the perfect place, every step of the way.
>> day two of the 2013 cpac conference just wrapped up today, and the list of speakers was a who's who in the the conservative movement because you probably weren't able to tune into all 11-plus hours of that event although some of you may have. we did it for you. take a look at the highlights. >> it's up to us to make sure that we learn from our mistakes and my mistakes and that he we take advantage of that learning to make sure that we take back the nation, take back the white house, get the senate and put in place conservative principles. let's get this straight, to protect our children in school, we recommend a trained professional with a gun. they recommend scissors. and they say we're crazy?
>> in our budget, draws a very sharp contrast with the left. it says to the people in unmistakable terms, they are the party of shared hardship, we are the property of equal opportuni opportunity. >> the fact is, we're run by either very foolish or very stupid people. what's going on in this country is unbelievable. >> don't tell me democrats are the party of the future when their presidential ticket for 2016 is shaping up to look like a rerun of the golden girls. >> we must go out and win the next election so we can preserve for our children and grandchildren all that makes us the greatest country in the history of the world. >> tucker: join me now with reaction to what you just saw is the great dr. charles krauthammer. thank you for joining us. >> it's a pleasure, with an introduction like that, ill he' take it anytime.
>> tucker: and it's heart felt. what does it tell us about the conservative movement and party, outline for the 2014 mid terms? >> some of what we saw today and yesterday tells us that we republicans have a strong bench. the pity it wasn't ready in 2012 when we had a fairly weak field and i thought by the way, to have the defeated presidential candidate romney speak and treat him as well as he was, i thought that was a lovely moment. it had no particular import for the future, but what you saw yesterday, you saw marco rubio, rand paul, and paul ryan today and a couple who were excluded, chris christie, bob mcdonnell of virginia, you know, who for the time being are slightly persona nongrata, but that would only be for a very short time. this is a party with a future. it's got a party with a very
strong and i think a winning ideology. i think this is a center right country and you know, there's a lot of despair among conservatives and republicans, that somehow the other party is the party of the future and demographics are running against us. i think that's simply not true. i think they are a party that is ideologically on the side of-- and as long as they nurture the young leaders who are coming up and stick to their principles, i think we have a very good chance. >> tucker: did you see the makings of any future dividing lines, fault lines? there are people walking throughout cpac, wearing "stand with rand" stickers on their blazers and i wonder if that suggests that some sort of real competition between the rand paul wing of the party going forward and say the marco rubio wing. do you think that's real? >> i think that's real, but i think that wing has always
been there, but it was the ron paul wing. and the problem with the wing, ron paul for all of his sincerity, shall we say, somewhat eccentric on his issues. rand paul is polished, sophisticated he doesn't obsess about the gold standard of the fed and they talks about things that appeal to the young. it's interesting, he's a libertarian so on social issues he deviates wildly from where the republicans have been the last 30 years, since reagan, so i think it does play to the young, but i don't know how it plays to the rest of the party, but even more radically, he is a semi isolationist. he talks about the filibuster was ostensibly about shooting a missile through a kitchen of a guy in topeka, but it was really about the whole war on terror abroad and how we ought to be conducting and if we are to be conducting it. and he speaks for a very
significant wing. party, of the country that is war weary and wants to withdraw. and that again is very much against the reagan tradition and against the mainstream of the party. so, i think it does have appeal to the young and i think that's what you see in cpac was disproportionately young, but i'm not sure how it plays. so while there is a split and i think he will enlarge the libertarian part of the party, i can't see it becoming in any way a majority of the party. >> tucker: is it your sense that republicans are energized by their apparent victory in the politics of the sequester and did in fact they win that political battle? >> they did, and the reason they're energized, it took them out of the death spiral. they had been losing everything, including an election they should have won in 2012 and then they got crushed on the debt-- on the fiscal cliff and on the sequester they simply stood firm, they did what reagan said, don't just do something,
stand there, and did nothing and won. and obama, we've seen his numbers fall and it told people, you know, this is not what you think. when you lose a general election, crushed on a tactical issue a few months later you get a sense we have no hope here. and i think the one tactical success with the sequester and the overshooting, obvious overshooting by the obama administration has grown a lot of life back as has the gathering of these young people in cpac and i think that despair is a temporary phenomenon. it's going to dissipate very quickly. >> tucker: charles krauthammer, the only person i met who speaks in perfect sentences, perfectly grammatically and perfectly formed. you're not reading that. >> i've been reading off notes written in code-- >> teleprompter.
>> sure. >> tucker: coming up-- >> a great job and therefore it should be built and also provides energy security for our country, for north america. it's a no-brainer this should be built. >> tucker: that was max baucus going against the president and saying we need to build the keystone pipeline and ought to do it right now. he's proposed legislation that would give congress the authority to green light that project. we'll talk with iowa congressman steve king for reaction with that. a local new york state sheriff fears gun laws will give fears gun laws will give criminals an upper [ man ] i got this citi thankyou card and started
earning loads of points. we'll leave that there. you got a weather balloon, with points? yes i did. [ man ] points i could use for just about anything. go. ♪ keep on going in this direction. take this bridge over here. there it i [ man ] so i used mineo get a whole new perspective. [ laughter ] [ male announcer ] earn points with the citi thankyou card and redeem them for just about anything. visit to apply.
and redeem them for just about anything. at od, whatever business you're in, that's the business we're in with premium service like one of the best on-time delivery records and a low claims ratio,
we do whatever it takes to make your business our business. od. helping the world keep promises.
>> our campaigner in chief hit the road again today and headed home to illinois to outline his energy agenda. with a battery research lab as his back drop president obama outlined the investments he's pushing for. the projects that many fear could turn into another solyndra. keystone pipeline which still awaits his decision. don't expect a verdict anytime soon, but an obama spokesman says the president's focus remains on new investment in green energy and combatting
climate change and not whether the keystone pipeline gets bill, but a new congressional bill could change that. as senator baucus puts forth legislation that would congress the ultimate authority to build that pipeline. what he said on fox. >> i spoke with the president yesterday and he says, he well, he's still maybe going to take the balance of this year to make a decision so we've put bipartisan legislation forward and got a lot of support for it and it's to get the project going. >> it's going to create a lot of jobs, thousands of jobs, and i don't think it's worth getting in the weeds whether it's 10,000 jobs or 15,000 jobs, it's going to create jobs. therefore it should be built and also provides energy security for our country, for north america. it's a no-brainer, this should be built. >> here with reaction is iowa congressman steve king. thank you for joining us, you don't see a lot of democrats come out and criticize obama in any way at all and we were talking about that in an earlier segment and here you see max baucus, decades long
democrat, going after the president's bopolicy, what's going on. >> i've seen in congress that members of the parties will tend to adhere to the policy of their president. and if the president isn't willing to support that pipeline, a lot of members of congress that don't understand why not will still oppose the pipeline, just like the president has. he spoke to us in conference there a couple of days ago and implied that there would be a decision within the next couple of weeks. >> tucker: this country, i think we can all agree, economists would agree would be in a depression if it weren't for domestic energy technologies that created this remarkable energy boom. does the white house understand that? >> i don't know. that's a pretty broad term when we say the white house. you have a lot of environmental extremists there in the white house, too, and they believe if you're burning hydrocarbons, that's going to increase the co 2 and increases the earth's temperature and we have climate change which used to be global warming and that's
the force that's pushing back against the keystone xl pipeline and there's no rational argument to oppose it and i think the president knows it and he sent out in a situation, with labor on one side and environmentalists on the other side and he's going to especially the senators on the border especially that they've taken the position that they have. you how vitally important to the president the environmental lobby is. and you know, he's helped greatly by organized labor as you said, they've been on his side, but do you think he sincerely believes we're going to empower america with algae and wind farms? >> i think that the president is directed by the political forces and i don't know if he has an opinion on this from the standpoint of how we're ever going to energize america or keep america's energy in place if we don't continue to develop hydrocarbons. another thing i reflect on on the topic, tucker, just a year ago at the cpac convention i sat down with a couple of
members of the canadian parliament who told me that prime minister harper was already back from china, having negotiated an agreement for canada, to be exporting oil to china, and that requires a pipeline going west through the cascades out to the pacific ocean. it's had a couple of problems since then, but this president, blocking keystone xl pipeline, forcing to sell to china and that's a national issue and disgrace if he would do that. >> tucker: what kind of upsidedown world are we living in, when the canadians know the market forces better than we do, when you get a lecture from canada how capitalism works. do you ever think you'd see that. >> and i apologize to the canadians from time to time the way we treat them. we blocked meat out of canada and forced them to develop their packing plants up there and export more meat. the north american market is no longer the american market and softwood in british
columbia because of the beetle has been blocked out of the american markets and now a situation oil from northern alberta is being blocked out of the north american market. and no way to treat our neighbor. >> tucker: i never thought i would take a lecture from canada. will the democrats in congress force the president's hand, do you think? >> i think it's unlikely that the bill will pass, but i need to also put a pat on the back to congressman lee terry in the house from nebraska who introduced a companion bill to get it passed through the house and senate and the president may veto and i think that harry reid is likely to block instead. but the pressure i think brings a decision closer where the president has to step out of the way, either that or take a lot more political heat, tucker. >> tucker: so we've seen not just solyndra, but a number of examples of crony capitalism and friends of the president have been awarded contracts and so-called green energy
companies that failed. republicans still hold the house and you have an oversight responsibility and subpoena power, are we going to see vigorous oversight of the projects by the house of representatives? >> well, i hope so, but you know, the pattern and the rhythm and the priorities that emerge through the committees are more or less selected out through the top tier leadership and the more that we can call from that from the rank and file and from the american public, the more likely we are to get that kind of oversight. i think there are a number of things this congress should look into aggressively. that's one of them. they've had hearings already on keystone xl pipeline in congress and maybe it's time to bring them up and put pressure on the people making those calls, tucker. >> tucker: sure, because the president doesn't hurt all big business, just the ones that aren't donating to him and a lot of people getting rich on green energy stuff and the public getting shafted. i hope you call attention to it. >> it puts us at a disadvantage and when you
diminish industry you're diminishing america's destiny at the same time, tucker. >> tucker: appreciate it. coming up next, the left is coming for your guns, america, but are all the newly proposed weapons bans leaving you at the mercy of criminals? one new york state sheriff said, oh, yes, these laws are leaving law abiding citizens very vulnerable. he'll explain in detail coming up. don't forget to log on to our special companion site hannity live and share your thoughts on this and more. on this and more. go to hannç@2x@x@x@x@x@x@x@ [ male announcer ] it's simple physics...
a body at rest tends to stay at rest... while a body in motion tends to stay in motion. staying active can actually ease arthritis symptoms. but if you have arthritis, staying active can be difficult. prescription celebrex can help relieve arthritis pain so your body can stay in motion. because just one 200mg celebrex a day can provide 24 hour relief for many with arthritis pain and inflammation.
plus, in clinical studies, celebrex is proven to improve daily physical function so moving is easier. celebrex can be taken with or without food. and it's not a narcotic. you and your doctor should balance the benefits with the risks. all prescription nsaids, like celebrex, ibuprofen, naproxen and meloxicam have the same cardiovascular warning. they all may increase the chance of heart attack or stroke, which can lead to death. this chance increases if you have heart disease or risk factors such as high blood pressure or when nsaids are taken for long periods. nsaids, like celebrex, increase the chance of serious skin or allergic reactions or stomach and intestine problems, such as bleeding and ulcers, which can occur without warning and may cause death. patients also taking aspirin and the elderly are at increased risk for stomach bleeding and ulcers. don't take celebrex if you have bleeding in the stomach or intestine, or had an asthma attack, hives, other allergies to aspirin, nsaids or sulfonamides. get help right away if you have swelling of the face or throat, or trouble breathing. tell your doctor your medical history. and find an arthritis treatment for you. visit and ask your doctor about celebrex.
for a body in motion. >> welcome back to "hannity." as governor andrew cuomo attempts to take away the second amendment rights of new yorkers, a group of sheriffs are fighting back, putnam county sheriff donald smith who says these gun laws are not only unconstitutional they would give the criminals an
advantage over law abiding citizens. joining us now putnam county sheriff donald smith. thank you for all that you're doing, you were the head of the sheriff's association. >> i was the immediate past president and i was the president at our annual meeting in albany in january. >> tucker: and you wrote governor cuomo a letter and he apparently doesn't like guns the at all. you look at what they were planning to do and discussed doing and restricting seven bullets in a gun. pretty frightening for a lot of people watching around the country. >> well, sean, this so-called new york safe act is really a misnomer. it certainly doesn't make the citizens of new york any safer, in fact, quite the contrary, it makes them less safe. as you know, there's more than 330 million guns in the country right now and the drug dealer, the gang member, the felon, they'll always get a gun. this law penalizes the law
abiding citizen. the law abiding gun owner who lawfully wants to own a gun for self-protection and to protect his family. >> isn't this though, by disarming people the way they are, what does it say to the people who have no intention ever to obey the law? they have free rein at that point. and revealing the location and homes of people that own guns in westchester county, et cetera and rob this house, don't rob this house. if you want guns try and rob this house? >> sean, you're absolutely correct. this law clearly is misguided. i know what their intentions are, but ultimately people will get a gun that want to commit a crime and this is clearly, sean, a violation of the second amendment and the constitution and they want to talk about, you know, deer
hunting and target shooting. >> nothing to do with it. >> it has nothing to do with it, it has to do with the constitution of the united states. it has to do with our founding document, the declaration of independence, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, it has to do with our second amendment and our bill of rights. it has to do with limited government and unfortunately, i'm also concerned that this is an incremental degradation of our rights. >> doesn't it have to be incremental for this reason and that is that if the next incident happens with a pistol, they'll say, well, we just didn't go far enough and let's say somebody, a perpetrator has a pistol with, you know, four or five or six pistols, they're going to be able to shoot, 60, 70, 80 round where you know what happened and reloading the pistol as a pistol marksman, you can drop a clip, put one in and be ready to fire quickly. how fast can you do that, two and a half seconds? >> we have to do it in two and a half seconds, but sean, this whole issue of seven rounds in
a magazine. >> crazy. >> of just arbitrarily removing guns and long guns from our people, from our citizens, just because of the fact they might have a bayonet lug or a pistol grip. it makes no sense. >> it's cosmetic. they don't know what they're talking about. >> and sean, when you look at places that have very strict gun control laws like washington d.c. and chicago, high crime rates, high murder rates, high crimes committed with guns, so it doesn't work. >> you're a law enforcement guy and we always hear law enforcement they want these guns off the street. that's not true, is it? >> sean, it's not true, particularly when you're talking about the elected law enforcement officials, the sheriffs. we have 3080 elected sheriffs across the country.
they have a special relationship to the people that they serve. they want to keep them safe. they want to protect their families. they don't have to kowtow or answer to politically elected executives. >> just the people. >> just the people. and i think that says a lot, sean, if they're accountable to the people they know what the people want. and they also know what keep the people safe. we had in albany, sean, we had 52 of the 58 sheriffs there, republicans, democrats, conservatives, liberals and moderates and we came to a consensus that the safe act, the new york so-called safe act needed to be modified. >> let me ask you the danger, if, let's say it's a home invasion, maybe, two or three perpetrators and you're allowed to have legally seven bullets in your gun. look, i've carried a gun, a pistol more than half my adult life. more than half my full life and i'm a good shot.
but under those circumstances, i'm not sure, i've never been tested. i assume i would be okay, but i've never been tested and i'm sure every police officer, law enforcement officer wonders if, god forbid, when that day comes, why you train so much and be prepared. what if you miss the first couple? what if it just wounds somebody, just tap them in the shoulder and he's still coming at you. you run out of bullets, then what happens? >> sean, why would we want to put our citizens at a disadvantage to the criminals? as i said, the criminals will -- they're not going to follow the law. they're not going to put seven rounds in their magazine. they're not going to not use an assault weapon. the point is, you know, this is really a fundamental right, the right to protect yourself, to protect your family. and here is another thing, law enforcement many times takes minutes. now, a trooper, a deputy sheriff or a police officer
may take minutes to get there, when seconds count. >> absolutely. >> and lives are lost. >> whatever it is will be over by the time they get there and chances are. and joe biden says aim the shotgun and fire through the door. that was his advice. i have shotguns and an ar-15. some shotguns have quite a bit of kick. what are the chances that a woman home alone picking up a shotgun is going to fall back having never shot it before, is not used to using a firearm. which weapon would you recommend? >> sean, i would recommend a weapon with a 223 caliber that gives little kick and where properly trained-- >> has no kick? >> very little, very little, sean. and i would recommend that we not give an advantage to the criminals. i recommend we protect our citizens and we not take away their second amendment rights. >> all right, sheriff, good to see you. thank you for what you're doing. and thank you for what you're doing.
>> thank you very much, appreciate it. >> god bless you. >> and renowned author thomas sowell is here with insights on his newest book that digs into race relations in america and we expose a secret about the president and his lunch. the president and his lunch. actually pretty shocking so michael, tell us why you used to book this fabulous hotel? well you can see if the hotel is pet friendly before you book it, and i got a great deal without bidding. and where's your furry friend? oh, i don't have a cat.
now you can save up to 50% during priceline's spring hotel sale use promo code spring for additional savings on all express deals, including pet friendly hotels. express deals. priceline savings without the bidding. >> announcer: meet mary. she loves tohop online with her debit ca and so does bill,
an identity thf who stole mary's identity, took over her bank accountand stole her hard-earned money. unfortunately, millions of ericans just like you learn misplaced information to wreak havoc on your life. this is identity theft and no one helps stop it better than lifelock. if mary had lifelock's bank account alerts, she would have been notified in time to help stop it. lifelock has the most protection available,y theft guarding your social security number, your money, your credit, even the eity in your home. you even get a $1 million service guarantee. that's security no one can bt. [♪...] [click click] [♪...]
>> wm welcome back to "hannity" in his new book, thomas sowell explores race and multi-culturalism throughout history and breaks new ground on a variety of racial issues and why race rehelations in america today are the way they are. joining us to walk more about the book is author and economist and frankly, hero to many, thomas sowell. thank you for joining us. >> thank you for having me. >> tucker: multi-culturalism is not only taken root in the schools, but you assault it ahead on and describe it as a barrier to progress and explain why multi-culturalism, if you would, is bad. >> it starts from a false premise which is something that all colleges are equal in some undefinable sense.
some cultures are better at some things and worse at other things, and particular times in history. one group's culture maybe asen dent and another group, but what you almost never see is what they assume is the norm namely all groups performing pretty much the same in all kinds of fields across the board. that you can go through centuries of history without finding a single example of that. >> tucker: you say that that assumption in fact holds different groups down. you write multi-culturalism paints people into the corner in which they happen to be born, but at least the cast system doesn't claim to benefit those at the bottom. >> when the multi-culturalists say, for example, the schools should not try to make black students speak standard english, the difference between speaking standard english and not speaking standard english can be huge in terms of your jobs, your
careers and all sorts of other things. >> tucker: so tell me how it's changed. you have a remarkable career, wrote 35 books, and i don't think your dad was a college professor. how was your education different from the education kids are receiving now? >> i get-- oh, it was better. that's the straight answer. i went to school in harlem, but even if you went to school in harlem in the 1940's and were you in one of the better classes because they did an ability groupings throughout the system. you would get a good education that allowed you to go anywhere. remarkable i came out of the harlem schools and went on to these universities, it was not that unusual. in fact, someone who lived about three blocks from me in harlem sent me a letter and said my gosh in one tenement
we had a college professor, a priest, a doctor and lawyer when this fella was growing up. so this was not that unusual. now, those avenues upward are simply not there. >> tucker: now, but what was the difference, if you could put a-- put a point on it. how was your -- what did your teachers teach you or not teach you that allowed others on your block, not a rich area, to succeed? >> first of all, they taught us the english language. they taught us the standard academic subjects. they were not teaching us, you know, tree hugging, they were not teaching us how to use condoms. they were not teaching us to be victims and they held us to the same standards that they held other kids to. now, those of us who came from homes where there were no -- no truly educated people, it was a little harder on us, but that's nothing compared to how hard it was going to be if they had made allowances and lowered the standards for us.
>> tucker: yes, this book is packed with all kinds of interesting information. this jumped out at me. you talked about the grotesque unemployment rate and you say that wasn't always the case that black participation were higher than whites up until about 1930. what changed? >> what changed was that the government intervention into the labor market. 1930 was the last year in which there was no federal minimum wage. they brought in the davis bacon act. and some of the sponsors of the act said they were producing that act precisely because blacks from the south, construction workers were coming up north and the construction companies were able to underbid the northern companies and get government contracts. this was meant to put a stop to that. >> tucker: amazing, to be totally clear up until 1930 under the roosevelt administration, of course that would have been a hoover
administration, but up until that point, there were lower unemployment rates in black neighborhoods than white neighborhoods and that has been the result, you think, of lack of government intervn interventi intervention. >> not always, but in 1930 that was the case, and the huge gap that you see today, that all has occurred under minimum wage laws. >> tucker: remarkable. what's the future of affirmative action? you write to some lengths about that. will it continue? >> it all depends whether the supreme court wants to give a clear decision one way or the other or whether they want to do what they've been doing now for more than 30 years, saying pious things, that you can't have quotas, but leaving wiggle rooms that you can have quotas, so long as you don't call them quotas. >> tucker: affirmative action helped people, do you believe
that? >> it may have some, but a marvellous study showing when they banned-- when he they banned affirmative action in california, university of california system, blacks began to graduate at a much higher rate than before, graduate with much higher grade point average and graduate in subjects like math and engineering to a far greater extent before because now the students winter ent to e parts of the university system that fit, and graduated. before you would flunk out of berkley and l.a., and now you could graduate from davis or santa cruz and go on to a clear. >> tucker: thanks so much for joining us. intellectuals and race. thank you. >> thank you. >> tucker: coming up maine senator susan colin may have let a well kept presidential
why do people count on sunsweet prune juice to stay fit on the inside? it's made only from prunes, nothing else. it works, simple as that. it's a natural source of fiber and five essential vitamins. it's the smart choice for me. stay fit on the inside with sunsweet's amazing juices. new honey bunches of oats greek yohere we go.ole grain. honey cornflakes and chunks of greek yogurt. i'm tasting both the yogurt and the honey at the same time. i'm like digging this yogurt thing. i feel healthy. new honey bunches of oats greek.
start right. ♪ kellogg's simple grains cereals take you from seed... ♪ spoon. with jt a few ingredients. ♪ kellogg's raisin bran, corn flakes and rice krispies. simple wholesome goodness. start simple. start right. >> welcome back to "hannity." we close the show with a revelation after long we will close the show with a well kept republican secret from susan collins of maine who host add lunch for president obama. the lawmaker rom her home state. but while things were cordial, a bizarre twist when senator
collins emerged and revealed to reports that the president declined to eat any of the food. why? she says it's because, brace yourself, his food taster was not present. well, the daily caller captured it all on tape and listen as the senator describes the menu. >>-- in keeping with the first lady's initiative and potato >> un